Omnibox should accept and navigate URLs dropped using drag and drop.

chrome/browser/ui/views/omnibox/omnibox_view_views.cc

Index: chrome/browser/ui/views/omnibox/omnibox_view_views.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/ui/views/omnibox/omnibox_view_views.cc b/chrome/browser/ui/views/omnibox/omnibox_view_views.cc
index 94a93c12ce9687e8fb8519dc54b6f1b606317b60..526295293b3bb11c56f448304536cd98de4a0a84 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/ui/views/omnibox/omnibox_view_views.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/ui/views/omnibox/omnibox_view_views.cc
@@ -779,6 +779,28 @@ void OmniboxViewViews::OnWriteDragData(ui::OSExchangeData* data) {
     data->SetURL(url, selected_text);
 }
 
+void OmniboxViewViews::AppendDropFormats(
+    int* formats,
+    std::set<ui::OSExchangeData::CustomFormat>* custom_formats) {
+  *formats = *formats | ui::OSExchangeData::URL;
+}
+
+int OmniboxViewViews::OnDrop(const ui::OSExchangeData& data) {
+  if (data.HasURL()) {

[sky, 2012/12/03 23:46:40]

Shouldn't this match the windows implementation? Can we refactor the two to
share?

[varunjain, 2012/12/04 18:44:13]

the windows implementation handles all drops in OmniboxViewWin, whereas, here,
we only handle URL drops while simple text drops are handled (rightfuly so) in
NativeTextfieldViews. There are about 5 lines of code that are common between
OmniboxViewViews and OmniboeViewWin that I can refactor to OmniboxView. IMHO it
is not worth doing that also because gtk has its own handling on drop and does
not look like can be merged (it does not even use OSExchangeData). It seems more
consistent to do this separately for Views and Win as well.

+    GURL url;
+    string16 title;
+    string16 text;
+    data.GetURLAndTitle(&url, &title);
+    if (url.is_valid())
+      text = UTF8ToUTF16(url.spec());
+    if (model()->CanPasteAndGo(text)) {
+      model()->PasteAndGo(text);
+      return ui::DragDropTypes::DRAG_COPY;
+    }
+  }
+  return ui::DragDropTypes::DRAG_NONE;
+}
+
 void OmniboxViewViews::UpdateContextMenu(ui::SimpleMenuModel* menu_contents) {
   // Minor note: We use IDC_ for command id here while the underlying textfield
   // is using IDS_ for all its command ids. This is because views cannot depend